Opinion
579 KA 17-00894
06-11-2021
EASTON THOMPSON KASPEREK SHIFFRIN LLP, ROCHESTER (PAUL A. MEABON OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT. SANDRA DOORLEY, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, ROCHESTER (DANIEL GROSS OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.
EASTON THOMPSON KASPEREK SHIFFRIN LLP, ROCHESTER (PAUL A. MEABON OF COUNSEL), FOR DEFENDANT-APPELLANT.
SANDRA DOORLEY, DISTRICT ATTORNEY, ROCHESTER (DANIEL GROSS OF COUNSEL), FOR RESPONDENT.
PRESENT: CARNI, J.P., LINDLEY, CURRAN, BANNISTER, AND DEJOSEPH, JJ.
MEMORANDUM AND ORDER
It is hereby ORDERED that the judgment so appealed from is unanimously affirmed.
Memorandum: On appeal from a judgment convicting him upon a jury verdict of, inter alia, attempted murder in the second degree ( Penal Law §§ 110.00, 125.25 [1] ), defendant contends that County Court erred in denying defense counsel's challenge for cause to a prospective juror. Defendant correctly concedes that the denial, even if error, would not require reversal because defense counsel exercised a peremptory challenge to excuse that prospective juror and did not thereafter exhaust defendant's peremptory challenges (see CPL 270.20 [2] ) and, contrary to defendant's contention, "defense counsel's failure to exhaust all of the available peremptory challenges does not constitute ineffective assistance of counsel" ( People v. Printup , 278 A.D.2d 834, 835, 719 N.Y.S.2d 434 [4th Dept. 2000], lv denied 96 N.Y.2d 786, 725 N.Y.S.2d 651, 749 N.E.2d 220 [2001] ).